What communication studies covers
Communication studies treats communication as something to analyse and explain. It does not teach you to produce messages. It asks how meaning is made and how it travels between people, groups, institutions and cultures. It also asks what effects messages have, and which theories and research methods can account for those effects. Depending on the course, this can include interpersonal and group communication, media and audiences, rhetoric and persuasion, language and discourse, information and networks, and research methods such as surveys, content analysis, interviews and experiments.
This sets it apart from its neighbours. Marketing is concerned with markets, consumers and commercial strategy. Advertising and public relations centre on planning and producing campaigns for organisations. A communication studies applicant may well be interested in adverts or campaigns. The statement should show interest in why they work or fail, who interprets them differently, and how you would find out. Whether you could make one yourself matters much less.
Branches and how evidence differs between them
Course titles in this area often signal an emphasis. You do not need to cover every branch. Pick the evidence that fits the course you are applying for.
General communication studies or communication science
These courses usually range widely across theory and methods. Some, especially those called communication science, lean towards empirical, social-scientific research.
Useful evidence shows curiosity about a communication process together with some sense of how it could be studied. For example, you might have noticed that people trusted a rumour more when it came from a family group chat than from a news site. You could then think about what would count as evidence for an explanation, rather than simply stating one.
Communication and information studies
These courses link communication with how information is organised, found, shared and filtered. Search engines, recommendation systems, archives and misinformation are typical areas.
Relevant interests include how algorithms shape what different users see, how people judge whether a source is reliable, and how online communities produce and check knowledge. Evidence might come from computing, library work or editing a wiki. Focus on the human side of the information, not on the technical build alone.
Intercultural communication and global communication and diversity
These courses examine communication across languages, cultures and identities. Topics include misunderstanding, translation, power, migration, representation and global media flows.
Strong evidence comes from specific situations where meaning shifted between cultural contexts, for example:
- politeness norms differing between generations or communities in your family
- a word that does not translate neatly
- how an international news story was framed differently in two countries
Being bilingual or having lived abroad is relevant but not enough on its own. What matters is what you noticed and how you might account for it. Avoid broad statements about whole cultures; specific, careful observation reads far better.
Health communication
This branch studies how health information is produced and understood. Typical areas are public health messaging, conversations between patients and clinicians, health literacy, risk communication and health misinformation.
Relevant evidence includes:
- noticing why a vaccination or screening message persuaded some people and not others
- translating medical letters for a relative
- seeing how information was explained in a care setting
Be clear that you are interested in the communication, not in training as a health professional. Do not present caring experience as clinical knowledge.
Science communication
This branch looks at how scientific knowledge reaches non-specialist audiences, and how public trust, controversy and uncertainty are handled.
Interests might include how uncertainty was reported during a scientific story, why some explainers succeed, or how museums design exhibits. An applicant with a science background can show understanding of the content. You still need to show interest in the audience and the message, as well as the science itself.
Political communication
This branch studies political messaging, news framing, debates, propaganda, social media and elections, public opinion, and the relationship between politicians, journalists and citizens.
Good evidence analyses how something was communicated, rather than arguing a political position. For example, you might compare how two outlets framed the same policy, or look at the rhetorical choices in a speech. Your own party allegiance is not the point. Analysis that would make sense to readers who disagree with you is more convincing.
Choosing interests worth writing about
The most useful interests are specific enough to say something about. Compare two statements:
- “I am interested in social media” gives the reader nothing to work with.
- “I am interested in why corrections to false claims spread less widely than the original claims” points to a real question in the field.
Topics that tend to give you material include:
- how framing changes interpretation, such as “migrants” versus “expats”, or “climate change” versus “climate crisis”
- why people believe or share misinformation
- how a meme or slang term changes meaning as it moves between groups
- non-verbal communication and misunderstanding in text-based messaging
- who is represented in media, and how audiences respond
- how public bodies communicate risk during emergencies
- persuasion in speeches, campaigns or online creators’ content
Choose one or two topics and develop them. A list of fashionable topics shows less than one carefully developed example.
Relevant reading and preparation
All of the following are optional suggestions, not requirements.
- Accessible academic or semi-academic reading on persuasion, media influence, misinformation, rhetoric or intercultural communication. Mention a book or article only if you can say what argument it made and where you agreed, disagreed or saw its limits.
- Comparing media coverage of one event across several outlets, or across countries. Note the differences in headlines, sources quoted, images and omissions. This is a small version of content analysis.
- Close analysis of a speech, campaign or explainer video. Identify its intended audience, its techniques and the evidence it uses. Then consider who might read it differently.
- A small, informal survey or set of conversations, for example on how classmates judge whether news is trustworthy. The value lies in what you learned about the difficulty of asking good questions and interpreting answers. Do not overclaim findings from a tiny, unrepresentative sample.
- Online lectures or courses on media, rhetoric, linguistics or research methods. These are worth mentioning only with a specific point taken from them.
Connecting school subjects
- English language or literature: rhetoric, narrative voice and audience. To make it communication studies, extend from close reading of texts to how real audiences receive messages in social contexts.
- Sociology: identity, power and representation fit well, especially with media or intercultural branches. Research methods coursework is directly useful.
- Psychology: persuasion, attitudes, memory and social influence link strongly to communication science and health communication.
- Media studies or film: representation and audience theory are relevant. Emphasise analysis over production unless the course has a practical element.
- Modern languages: translation and pragmatics (how context shapes meaning) suit intercultural courses.
- Politics or history: propaganda, speeches and public opinion suit political communication.
- Sciences: explaining complex ideas, and how uncertainty is communicated, suit science or health communication.
- Maths, statistics or computing: data, networks and survey analysis suit communication science and information-focused courses.
- An extended project or independent essay on a communication question is strong evidence. Explain your method and what you would change, not just your conclusion.
Using ordinary experience if you have no directly relevant activities
You do not need a media internship. Everyday experience can be useful if you treat it as an observation to analyse. For each example below, note the specific connection and its limits.
- Customer-facing jobs (retail, hospitality, call centres).
- Connection: you saw how scripts, tone and wording affected complaints or confusion, and how communication shifted with different customers.
- Limit: this shows observation of interpersonal communication, not expertise in organisational communication research.
- Caring for or interpreting for a relative.
- Connection: translating appointments, letters or forms for a family member with limited English or a disability is directly relevant to intercultural and health communication. You may have seen how jargon, assumptions or rushed explanations created barriers.
- Limit: it does not make you a trained interpreter or health professional. Write about what you noticed, not about expertise.
- Volunteering (charity shops, food banks, youth groups).
- Connection: how organisations explained their services, recruited volunteers or spoke to people who might feel stigmatised.
- Limit: unless you designed the messaging, you observed it rather than created it.
- Running a social media account, gaming community, fan page or club newsletter.
- Connection: what drove engagement, how community norms formed, and how conflict or misinformation was handled.
- Limit: follower numbers do not show analytical ability. What you understood about audience behaviour does.
- Debating, Model UN or student council.
- Connection: these link to rhetoric and political communication if you reflect on why certain arguments persuaded particular audiences.
- Limit: winning debates shows skill at persuasion, not analysis of it. Make the analysis visible.
- Living across languages or cultures, including within one household.
- Connection: these experiences offer concrete cases of shifting meaning.
- Limit: they are your own experience, not general truths about whole groups.
- Hobbies such as following news, podcasts, YouTube creators or political commentary.
- Connection: these become relevant when you compare and question them, for instance how a creator builds trust or how comment sections reframe a video.
- Limit: simply consuming media is not evidence of interest in studying it.
What useful reflection looks like
Reflection in this subject turns an experience into a communication question. A practical pattern is:
- Describe a specific moment.
- Identify the communication process involved, such as framing, audience, trust, translation or medium.
- Offer a tentative explanation.
- Recognise what you cannot yet explain, or how it might be studied.
A weak version: “Working in a café taught me the importance of communication.”
A stronger version names the moment and the process. For example, you noticed that the same allergen information was understood differently when given verbally than when printed on a menu. Then add what that suggests about medium and attention, and what you would want to know before drawing conclusions.
Similarly, rather than writing that you “love analysing the media”, describe one comparison you made and the pattern you found. Then say why that pattern could have more than one explanation. Recognising complexity and the limits of your own evidence suits a subject built on research.
Matching evidence to the course and the specialism
Read the course descriptions carefully. Some communication courses are research- and theory-heavy. Others combine analysis with practical work. Some are paired with other subjects, for example in joint or conjoint degrees with biomedical science or global studies.
If you are applying for a combined programme, show where the two subjects meet. Health communication might connect with biomedical science, and intercultural or political communication with global studies. Do not write two separate mini-statements.
If you are applying for several courses with different emphases, centre your statement on what they share: analysing how communication works, for whom, and with what effects. Avoid leaning heavily on one specialism that only some of your courses cover.
Subject-specific pitfalls
- Confusing studying communication with being a good communicator. Claiming to be confident or articulate tells the reader little. Interest in how communication works tells them more.
- Writing a marketing or PR statement. If your evidence is all about selling products or running campaigns, the statement may read as aimed at a neighbouring subject. Commercial examples can work if you analyse them rather than celebrate them.
- Treating career plans as the subject. Ambitions in journalism, PR or politics can be mentioned briefly. The statement should still focus on the academic study of communication.
- Vague claims about social media’s influence. Statements such as “social media is changing the world” add nothing. Be specific about which platform, which users and which effect.
- Taking sides instead of analysing, particularly in political communication.
- Overgeneralising about cultures in intercultural applications.
- Overclaiming from small or informal research. Present a classroom survey as a learning exercise, not a finding.
- Name-dropping theorists or concepts you cannot apply to an example.
- Inflating incidental experience. Helping with a school newsletter is not editorial expertise, and translating for family is not professional interpreting.
For general advice on planning, structure and editing, read our personal statement writing guide.